My thoughts on the world.

If you were following the results of last night’s primary race in California, it looked as if Hillary wrapped up her nomination. The Associated Press and other news outlets seemed to confirm this as well. But did she really pull off the historic victory she and AP claimed, and is there a conspiracy on the part of the media to ensure that Hillary Clinton becomes the Democratic nominee?

The raw numbers certainly suggest that Hillary is the nominee. However, on pledged delegates alone, she cannot win. There are only 20 more delegates up for grabs. Even if she wins all of these, she will only have 2,204 delegates, short of the 2,383 required for nomination. She is going in with a fairly strong case on delegate numbers alone (2,184 vs. 1,804). However, let’s take a closer look at last night’s numbers.

State

% Bernie Sanders

% Hillary Clinton

North Dakota

64.2

25.6

California

43.1

56.0

Montana

51.1

44.6

New Jersey

36.7

63.6

New Mexico

48.5

51.5

South Dakota

49.0

51.0

Average

48.8

48.7

If we use last night’s results as a barometer for who the public wishes to see as the Democratic nominee, Bernie Sanders is actually favored by the public (narrowly)! This is hardly the sweeping victory AP and other outlets are claiming. By these numbers, the two nominees are effectively tied. If Sanders can persuade the superdelegates correctly, he could become the nominee.

What’s going on? Is there some sort of conspiracy among liberal media to make sure that Hillary is nominated?

No. There is no conspiracy.

Why? Take a look at what CBS CEO Les Moonves said about Donald Trump’s campaign.

“It may not be good for America, but it’s damn good for CBS.”

In that statement, Les indicated that Trump’s campaign, which is a controversial one, is getting people to tune into CBS. More eyeballs on their programming equals more advertising revenue. As a result, they have an incentive to run controversial coverage. Major media outlets are for-profit, after all.

What does this have to do with the Associated Press? CBS is a for-profit company, but the AP isn’t. But some of the organizations which use AP’s content are. If we use Les’ logic, it is in AP’s indirect best interest to run controversial stories, after all, they attract viewers and readers. AP has stated that Hillary has enough delegates to be the party’s nominee.

Scenario 1: If she becomes the nominee, they can appeal to authority and be recognized as such – after all, they called it before everyone else. They must be smart.

Scenario 2: If Bernie becomes the nominee, doesn’t AP look stupid and lose credibility? Sure, for a little bit. They will lose credibility in the short term.

Both scenarios are irrelevant. With the AP running that headline, they have indirectly caused readers and viewers to consume AP content from outlets that buy their wire package. For-profit media is able to garner more viewers and more ad revenue over this controversial headline. It doesn’t matter that after looking at the numbers, most people are calling bullshit on the AP’s headline. The content has been consumed, and the ad revenue acquired.

There is no conspiracy going on. Just clever manipulation to get you to view advertisements. Same as always.